Happiness vs. mindfulness exercises for individuals vulnerable to depression
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An online ‘positivity’ exercise involving the practice of discrete positive emotions was pitted against a mindfulness meditation exercise and an active placebo control. The effects of positivity and meditation were examined in relationship to personality variables known to entail vulnerability to depression. Participants (N = 741) were randomly assigned to the positivity, mindfulness, or control condition. They completed their exercise for three weeks and were assessed on measures of subjective well-being at baseline, post-test, and one, and two months later. Results indicated that all groups showed significant decreases in depressive symptoms from baseline to two months. The positivity exercise uniquely predicted increases in meaning, pleasure, engagement, and satisfaction in life across follow-ups. Dependent individuals responded favorably to the positivity intervention in the short run, but worsened in the long run for pleasure-related happiness. Self-criticism was associated with significantly greater gains in life satisfaction following exercise completion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it